Greenpeace co-founder, ex-director calls nuclear safest energy via NewsNation

Sean Noone

(NewsNation) — A former director and founding member of the environmental organization Greenpeace says he disagrees with the group’s stance on nuclear energy.

“Nuclear energy is the safest of all the electricity technologies we have,” Dr. Patrick Moore told NewsNation’s “Special Report.”

He pointed to more than 100 nuclear plants in the U.S. and Canada that are currently operational and said no one has ever been injured as a result of radiation.

Moore said the Chernobyl disaster of 1986 is a “complete exception” because the Russians built a poorly designed reactor.Weak protection for vanishing whale violates law, judge says 

“No other nuclear plant in the world has ever had that kind of nuclear accident. Fukushima and Three Mile Island — which are also mentioned all the time about nuclear accidents — did not harm anyone, never mind kill anyone from radiation,” Moore said.

Read more at Greenpeace co-founder, ex-director calls nuclear safest energy 

Posted in *English | Tagged , | Comments Off on Greenpeace co-founder, ex-director calls nuclear safest energy via NewsNation

柏崎原発再稼働「反対」減少も4割超 「賛成」は増加 via 新潟日報

参院選・新潟日報社出口調査

新潟日報社が参院選投開票日の10日に実施した出口調査では、投票行動に加えて東京電力柏崎刈羽原発の再稼働についての賛否も尋ねた。「反対」「どちらかといえば反対」の否定的な回答は計44・5%で、「賛成」「どちらかといえば賛成」の肯定的回答の計34・5%を上回った。肯定的な回答は、5月の前回調査から増加した=グラフ参照=。

続きは[有料サイト]柏崎原発再稼働「反対」減少も4割超 「賛成」は増加

Posted in *日本語 | Tagged , | Comments Off on 柏崎原発再稼働「反対」減少も4割超 「賛成」は増加 via 新潟日報

Interview: Small modular reactors get a reality check about their waste via Bulletin of Atomic Scientists

By François Diaz-Maurin | June 17, 2022

[…]

Scientists have started working on independent reviews of those claims. The results showed that SMRs do not necessarily perform better than gigawatt-scale reactors on a variety of measures. A recent Stanford-led study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) provides for the first time a comprehensive analysis of the nuclear waste generated by small modular reactors. The study concludes that most current SMR designs will actually significantly increase the volume and complexity of nuclear waste requiring management and disposal when compared to existing gigawatt-scale light water reactors.

Here, Bulletin associate editor François Diaz-Maurin talks with Lindsay Krall, the lead author of that study and a former MacArthur postdoctoral fellow at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC) who is now based in Sweden.

[…]

Diaz-Maurin: Great. Let’s turn to your research findings now. Most SMRs are said to adopt an “integral” design, in which the reactor core and auxiliary systems are all contained within a reactor vessel. Now, because of their smaller size and compact design, one can expect that SMRs will generate less waste than larger reactors that operate at the gigawatt scale. But you have reached the opposite conclusion in your study, that SMRs will produce more voluminous and chemically/physically reactive waste than light-water reactors. And this by factors of 2 to 30. How is that? It seems counterintuitive…

Krall: Well, one thing that’s clear from the analysis is that the waste output really differs depending on the type of coolant the reactor is using. If it’s using water, then we have processes to treat that water and decontaminate it and hold it so the water coolant itself does not become radioactive waste. However, for a sodium-cooled reactor, for instance, that sodium coolant is likely to become low-level waste at the end of the reactor’s lifetime, because it becomes contaminated and activated during reactor operation. So, the “up to 30 times more waste” that’s been driving the headlines, it’s mostly the sodium coolant. Another aspect is that things in a small reactor do not scale intuitively compared to other forms of energy. For instance, one thing I went into was “neutron leakage.”

[…]

Diaz-Maurin: In the paper, you say that compared to large reactors, SMRs will increase the volume and complexity of those wastes. I get the volume part. But what is this complexity about?

Krall: It’s what I mean with “different characteristics” of the spent fuel, not least being this fissile isotope concentration. It also produces heat. It has a particular radionuclide composition, including fission products, which can be both short- and long-lived. And so, I employed four different metrics to measure the spent fuel. And then the long-lived low- and intermediate-level waste in the article is the activated waste. This waste is so close to the reactor core that it absorbs the neutrons that are being leaked and becomes activated. In current reactors, the activated waste is mostly steel from the structural components that keep the core intact. This steel will also become activated in SMRs and, as a result, it will contain short- and long-lived nuclides that need to be dealt with during decommissioning. Reactor decommissioning will require radiation shielding and that steel, the activated steel, will also need to be disposed of in a geologic repository.

Diaz-Maurin: What’s the difference between short-lived and long-lived waste from the perspective of waste management?

Krall: Long-lived waste should be disposed of in a permanent geologic repository—a passively safe, rock cavern with multiple engineered barriers—where the radioactive materials discharged from the reactors will be contained over long periods of time so that they can decay. Short-lived waste includes mostly the reactor structures that have come in contact with a primary coolant that was circulating around the reactor core and through the steam generators. This waste also should go to some sort of disposal site. Sweden, for instance, has a 50-meter-deep repository, whereas some countries just dispose of it in shallow landfills.

[…]

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , | Comments Off on Interview: Small modular reactors get a reality check about their waste via Bulletin of Atomic Scientists

Nuclear waste from small modular reactors via PNAS

By Lindsay M. Krall, Allison M. Macfarlane, Rodney C. Ewing

PNAS202111833_proof.pdf

Small modular reactors (SMRs; i.e., nuclear reactors that produce <300 MWelec each) have garnered attention because of claims of inherent safety features and reduced cost. However, remarkably few studies have analyzed the management and disposal of their nuclear waste streams. Here, we compare three distinct SMR designs to an 1,100-MWelec pressurized water reactor in terms of the energy-equivalent volume, (radio-)chemistry, decay heat, and fissile isotope composition of (notional) high-, intermediate-, and low- level waste streams. Results reveal that water-, molten salt–, and sodium-cooled SMR designs will increase the volume of nuclear waste in need of management and disposal by factors of 2 to 30. The excess waste volume is attributed to the use of neutron reflectors and/or of chemically reactive fuels and coolants in SMR designs. That said, volume is not the most important evaluation metric; rather, geologic repository performance is driven by the decay heat power and the (radio-)chemistry of spent nuclear fuel, for which SMRs provide no benefit. SMRs will not reduce the generation of geochemically mobile 129I, 99Tc, and 79Se fission products, which are important dose contributors for most repository designs. In addition, SMR spent fuel will contain relatively high concentra- tions of fissile nuclides, which will demand novel approaches to evaluating criticality dur- ing storage and disposal. Since waste stream properties are influenced by neutron leakage, a basic physical process that is enhanced in small reactor cores, SMRs will exacer- bate the challenges of nuclear waste management and disposal.

Read article.

Posted in *English | Tagged , | Comments Off on Nuclear waste from small modular reactors via PNAS

The power of the sun via Beyond Nuclear International

Indian community will go net zero using radioactive waste funds

By Linda Pentz Gunter

What do you do if you are the decades-long reluctant custodians of high-level radioactive waste from reactors that don’t even provide your electricity?

That is the situation the Prairie Island Indian Community of Minnesota has lived with since the 1970s. But even as the tribe continues to agitate for the reactors to close and the waste to be removed from their land (*see editor’s note, 7th paragraph), they have a plan that truly exemplifies atoms for peace.

Excel, the owners of the two reactors that comprise the Prairie Island nuclear power plant, pays into a state fund to house the waste on Indian land. In recent years, tribal leaders successfully persuaded the state to redirect those funds so they could create an energy system for their community that would be net-zero in emissions. It’s known as the Prairie Island Net Zero Emissions Project.

Tribal Council Vice President Shelley Buck, told Yale Climate Connections: “Our history and our energy story has been negatively linked to the nuclear power plant and nuclear waste storage site,” Buck says. “We want to change that narrative and use that energy production as a positive force — not only for our tribe today, but for the next seven generations, as our Dakota ways teach us.”

As the Prairie Island Indian Community explains it:

“The Prairie Island Indian Community, a federally recognized Indian Nation, is located in southeastern Minnesota along the banks of the Mississippi River, approximately 30 miles from the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. Twin nuclear reactors and 47 large steel nuclear waste storage casks sit about 700 yards from Prairie Island tribal homes. 

“A total of 98 casks could be stranded on Prairie Island indefinitely unless the federal government fulfills its commitment to create a permanent storage solution. The only evacuation route off the Prairie Island is frequently blocked by passing trains. The Tribe has been pushing for the removal of the nuclear waste since 1994 when Xcel Energy was first allowed to store the waste near its reservation.” (*Editor’s note: Beyond Nuclear does not endorse transporting high-level radioactive reactor waste off-site to other communities. Beyond Nuclear supports hardened on-site storage until such time as a suitable, less dangerous alternative can be found.)

The plan, that would transform nuclear waste fees into a green economy, will likely take three years, the tribe says, during which time it plans to install solar energy and make energy efficiency upgrades. It has found two Native American-owned companies to help them achieve this — Indian Energy and Chief Strategy Group.

The funding amounts to “a $46 million appropriation from the Minnesota Legislature in 2020 to develop and execute a comprehensive renewable energy plan for the Tribe that focuses on conservation, on-site renewable energy generation, and sustainability initiatives,” the tribe’s press release stated.

“We are changing our Tribe’s future with this net-zero project,” said Tribal Council President Shelley Buck. “We found partners that not only understand how to create the right energy solution, but they also understand Native culture and the importance of what this project means to our sovereignty and our future. That’s exciting.”

[…]

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The power of the sun via Beyond Nuclear International

Radioactivity under the sand via Beyond Nuclear International

The buried waste from French nuclear tests in Algeria

By Jean-Marie Collin and Patrice Bouveret

The following is the summary from the longer report, which can be read here.

[…]

Between 1960 and 1996, France carried out 17 nuclear tests in Algeria and 193 in French Polynesia. In Algeria, atmospheric and underground tests were carried out at the Reggane and In Ekker sites, in an atmosphere of secrecy and conflict between an Algerian nation under construction and a colonial power seeking strategic autonomy. A majority of the tests – 11 – were carried out after the Evian agreements (18 March 1962), which established Algeria’s independence. 

It was not until the 1990s that the first independent studies relating to some of the dark events of that period finally became available. Disclosure about accidents that happened during some of the tests, about the risk that populations and soldiers were exposed to, in Algeria and in Polynesia alike, led to the implementation of the law “on 5 January 2010, granting recognition and compensation for the victims of French nuclear testings“. But this law does not take into account any environmental consequences. 

In French Polynesia, the strong mobilization of many associations has enabled the environmental consequences to be taken into account and the first remediation steps to be put in place. For Algeria, the situation is different. Due to a tumultuous Franco-Algerian relationship, the absence of archives, and the absence of registers of local workers who participated in the tests, the data on the consequences of the tests remains patchy and incomplete. It was only in 2010, thanks to independent expertise, that a map from the Ministry of Defense was revealed, showing that the European continent was also affected by fallout from the nuclear tests carried out in the south of the Sahara. 

[…]

From the beginning of nuclear tests, France set up a policy of burying all waste in the sands. The desert is seen as an “ocean”, from a common screwdriver – as it is shown in the study by “Secret Defense” documents and photos – to planes and tanks: everything that may have been contaminated by radioactivity had to be buried. France has never revealed where exactly this waste was buried, or how much of it was buried. In addition to these contaminated materials, voluntarily left on site to future generations, there are two other categories: non-radioactive waste (resulting from the operation and dismantling of the sites and the presence of the Algerian army since 1966) and radioactive materials emitted by nuclear explosions (vitrified sand, radioactive slabs and rocks). Most of this waste is left in the open, without being secured in any way, and is accessible to the local population, creating a high risk for health and environmental damage. 

[…]

France and Algeria are on opposite sides in this regard. One is a “nuclear-weapon” and the other a “non-nuclear-weapon” State according to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty, and they have opposing views regarding the TPNW. France has constantly denounced it. Algeria has participated in TPNW negotiations, signed the treaty and begun its ratification process. Once the treaty is ratified by the Algerian State and enforced, Algiers will have to start implementing its positive obligations (articles 6 and 7).  

Even if France refuses to bind itself to the TPNW, it could participate in this process. Indeed, the opening of “a new chapter in their relationship”, according to the Algiers Declaration in 2012, like the ongoing initiatives (combined working group dedicated to compensation for the Algerian victims of French nuclear tests, the high-level Algerian-French intergovernmental committee) shows that this cooperative work can be carried out, without France breaking with its current position on the TPNW. There are several examples of inter-state cooperation in establishing aid programmes, even when these countries have had a turbulent history; just as there is at least one example of participation of a country in a programme for rehabilitation of the environment, even when, from a legal aspect, the country was not compelled to do so. 

[…]

French political and military authorities waited almost 50 years before acknowledging the consequences for health and environment from the atmospheric and underground nuclear tests which were conducted in the Algerian Sahara and then in French Polynesia between 13 February 1960 and 27 January 1996. 

The situation regarding the French nuclear test sites in the Sahara is special. Algeria is the only state to have gained independence while its “coloniser” was conducting tests on its territory. Of the 17 French nuclear tests in the Sahara, a majority (11 tests, all underground) were conducted following the Evian Accords (18 March 1962), which signalled Algeria’s independence after a particularly deadly war. 

[…]

The complex postcolonial relationship between these two countries has resulted in the environmental and health impacts of Saharan nuclear tests never really giving rise to official and scientific publications or to cooperation on this issue, either on the part of French or Algerian political authorities. It is therefore striking to note how little interest the environmental and health consequences from nuclear testing in Algeria have aroused over several decades, unlike what happened in French Polynesia – where France conducted 193 nuclear tests. Even today, these consequences remain a complicated subject to discuss. 

[…]

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Radioactivity under the sand via Beyond Nuclear International

Nuclear plant cooling system stops working for 8 hours via NHK World-Japan

[…]

Japan Nuclear Fuel Limited reported the problem at a plant compound in Rokkasho Village on Sunday. It says the glitch poses no threat to the environment.

The operator says one of the tanks storing radioactive waste lost its cooling functions for about eight hours from around 3:30 p.m.

About 2,600 liters of waste liquid produced during a test operation was stored in the tank.

The operator says it found cooling water levels dropping at around 7 p.m. on Saturday. An inspection discovered that the valve of a circulating water piping system had been turned off for some reason.

The operator said the temperature of the waste liquid briefly rose to 32 degrees from the usual 24 degrees. It says there is no leakage of radioactive substances.

The operator said it officially confirmed at 2:26 a.m. on Sunday that the cooling function had stopped working, explaining why it announced the problem one day after it occurred.

The Aomori prefectural government has dispatched officials to the plant and urged the operator to determine the cause of the problem and come up with measures to prevent a recurrence.

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Nuclear plant cooling system stops working for 8 hours via NHK World-Japan

Macron facing ‘Fukushima-style’ horror accident as EDF reactors crack force shutdown via Express

By ANTONY ASHKENAZ10:01, Sun, Jul 3, 2022

France is facing a relatively unique energy crisis when compared to other countries in Europe. The country is not heavily dependent on natural gas, Russian or otherwise, getting most of its energy supplies from nuclear power, which generates 70 percent of the country’s electricity. However, Paris has been forced to shut down many French reactors, as a recent report warned Mr Macron of significant corrosion safety problems in EDF nuclear power plants in France as cracks were detected in some nuclear reactors.

Speaking to Express.co.uk, Dr Bernard Laponche, the co-author of this study warned that in many of these reactors, cracks to cooling systems could cause devastating accidents. 

He said: “If the defects are detected in or near the welds, or near the junction between these and the primary cooling circuit cause a breach in the cooling system with an important loss of water, this can lead to the partial or total melting of the fuel assemblies in the reactor core. 

“That means the possibility of a Three Mile Island or a Fukushima-type accident.”

[…]

Dr Laponche warned that all other reactors will likely be checked by for these issues within the next year. 

If further evidence of cracks are found, the corresponding part of the reactor will be removed and replaced, in a procedure that Dr Laponche estimates could take a year.

He added: “This means that a large part of the EDF nuclear fleet will be gradually shut down. 

“Next winter, France will reopen coal and gas plants. But the country has very few of them and it will have to import a maximum of electricity from abroad. 

“Important efforts will be necessary to reduce electricity consumption, particularly at the winter peak (due in particular to a high proportion of electrical heating).”

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Macron facing ‘Fukushima-style’ horror accident as EDF reactors crack force shutdown via Express

原発避難者訴訟 国の責任は否定されたが…最高裁判決文に異例の反対意見 三浦守裁判官が痛烈批判 via 東京新聞

 東京電力福島第一原発事故の福島県内外の住民らが国と東電に損害賠償を求めた4訴訟の最高裁判決。国の責任は否定されたが、1人の裁判官は他3人の多数意見の判決を痛烈に批判し、国が東電に規制権限を行使しなかったのは「国家賠償法1条1項の適用上違法だ」とする反対意見を書いた。原告らはこの反対意見を「第2判決」と呼び、後続の第2陣や全国各地の同様の訴訟で、最高裁で勝つまで闘い続ける覚悟を固めている。(片山夏子)

[…]

判決文の実質的な判断が書かれた部分が4ページなのに比べると、反対意見の内容は多岐にわたり、判断も詳細な理由が述べられている。「多数意見は国や東電の責任を問う裁判で、最大争点である津波の予見可能性や長期評価の信頼性への明確な評価を避けるなど、触れていない重要なことが多い」 

一方で、三浦裁判官は長期評価も予見可能性も認めた上で「想定された津波で敷地が浸水すれば、本件事故と同様の事故が発生する恐れがあることは明らかだった」とし、遅くとも長期評価公表から1年後の2003年7月頃までには、国が東電に何らかの対策を取らせるべきだったとした。 

また判決の多数意見は、予想された津波以上の津波が敷地を襲っており、対策も防潮堤以外は一般的でなかったとし、「仮に津波対策が取られていたとしても、事故が発生した可能性が相当ある」と判断。国が東電に対策を義務づけなくても、原発事故の発生に因果関係はないと結論づけた。

◆多重的な防護対策「検討すべきだった」

 これに対し、三浦裁判官は津波が予想された方角以外からも遡上そじょうする可能性の想定をするのは「むしろ当然」とし、津波の大きさも相応の幅を持って考えるべきだと言及。津波の侵入口や経路をふさぐ水密化も国内外で当時実績があり、それら多重的な防護対策を「万が一にも深刻な災害が起こらないようにする法令の趣旨に照らし、検討すべきだった」とした。 

さらに三浦裁判官は、原発の技術基準は電力会社の事業活動を制約し、経済活動に影響する一方で、原発事故が起きれば多くの人の生命や、身体や生活基盤に重大な被害を及ぼすと言及。「生存を基礎とする人格権は憲法が保障する最も重要な価値」とした上で、「経済的利益などの事情を理由とし、必要な措置を講じないことは正当化されるものではない」と断じた。馬奈木弁護士はこう解説する。「つまり原発稼働による経済活動を優先し、人の生命や身体を脅かすことは許されないということ。これはまさに原告側が訴えてきたこと。もっとも注目されるべき点ではないか」 

国の規制権限は「原発事故が万が一にも起こらないようにするために行使されるもの」という三浦裁判官の反対意見は、1992年の四国電力伊方原発を巡る最高裁判決が説いた内容を受けたもの。馬奈木弁護士は言う。「重要な争点にも触れないなど判断を避けた部分が多く、今回の最高裁判決は、後続裁判が縛られるものではない。この第2判決の意見が多数派になり、再び最高裁まで勝ち上がって勝訴するまで闘う」

◆「希望持てる」続く裁判に光

 三浦裁判官の反対意見をよりどころに今後も国の責任を追及していくとしても、やはり17日の最高裁判決の衝撃は、原告団にとって大きかった。 

「こんな判決認めねぇぞー。許せねー、許せねー」17日午後、最高裁正門前で福島訴訟の服部崇事務局次長(51)は声を振り絞って叫び、泣き崩れた。東電の3幹部を訴えた刑事訴訟も含め、国や東電の責任を問う全国各地の約30の被災者訴訟で、弁護団が連携して積み上げてきた十分な証拠があり、勝訴だと信じてきたから「パニック状態だった」と振り返る。

 翌日の原告団らの判決検討会には、服部さん含め原告団幹部が顔を出さなかった。服部さんも抜け殻のようになり、福島で判決を待つ原告仲間にもどう言っていいのか分からず、福島にも帰れなかった。心配して電話をかけてきた馬奈木弁護士に「泣いてばかりいたら、これで終わってしまうぞ」と言われ、気力を振り絞った。南雲芳夫弁護士にも「判決文を読め、希望が持てるぞ」と言われ、福島に戻り判決文を読んだ。 

「三浦裁判官の反対意見は俺たちが求めていた判決だった。俺は自分のためじゃなく、原発事故の被害にあった福島県民全体のために頑張ってきた。闘いの第1章は終わったけど、これから第2章だ」。闘う力が体内から湧き上がってくるのを服部さんは感じた。

◆二度と原発事故が起きない社会を

[…]

 2016年以降に福島地裁に提訴した「福島訴訟」第2陣の原告は、1200人を超える。判決直後の週末に行われた弁護士による原告募集説明会には、54人が参加。その場で原告に加わった人のほか、「国の責任を認めない最高裁判決はおかしいと思って参加した」という人もいた。7月も現時点で、県内各地で14回の説明会が予定され、弁護団は「原告を第1陣、第2陣合わせて早い段階で1万人としたい」と意気込む。

福島訴訟は、各地域で共通する最低限の被害を立証し、原告以外の同じ地域にいる住民も同等の賠償が得られるように考えており、原発事故の被害者全体の救済を目指す。「放射性物質が飛び散った福島県民は全員、被害を受けた近隣の県の人たちも原告になれる」と弁護団は説明する。 

判決後、福島訴訟の原告団が東電や経済産業省、原子力規制委員会、福島県議会の各党を回り、被害者の早期救済や賠償基準を定めた中間指針の見直しを求める行動には、第2陣提訴がなく今回の最高裁判決で敗訴が確定した「群馬訴訟」代表の丹治杉江さん(65)や、「千葉訴訟」共同代表の瀬尾誠さん(69)も参加した。

丹治さんは福島市内で開かれた記者会見で「後続の裁判を支えるなど、いろいろな形で不正をただしていきたい。未来を担う子どもたちのためにも、この悔しさをエネルギーに闘っていきたい」と話した。 

「あれだけの原発事故を起こしながら、国にも東電にも過失責任がないとされ、対策を取ったとしても事故は防げなかったと多数意見はした。対策を取っても防げないのならば、深刻な被害を出す原発事故を防ぐには、原発の稼働を止めるしかないということになる。社会としてそれでも原発を稼働するのかが問われている」と馬奈木弁護士。 

もともと最高裁判決が出ても終わりではなく、原告団は解散しないことは決まっていたと明かした中島孝原告団長(66)はこう語る。「このままでは原発事故の責任を誰も取らず、あの事故の教訓も何も学ばないまま。原発事故はまた起きる。二度と原発事故が起きない社会を次世代に引き継ぐまで闘い続ける決意は変わらない」

 デスクメモ 国も東電も悪くない。悪いのは想定外の津波を起こした「自然」だと最高裁判決。あまりと言えばあまりな理屈だが、逆説的に原発推進側にとっても痛いはずだ。いくら防護をしても自然には無力で事故は防げない、と認定されたのだから。これでどうやって再稼働をするというのか。(歩)

全文

Posted in *English | Tagged , , | Comments Off on 原発避難者訴訟 国の責任は否定されたが…最高裁判決文に異例の反対意見 三浦守裁判官が痛烈批判 via 東京新聞

<社説>核禁止条約会議閉幕 不参加は歴史的過ち via 琉球新報

ウィーンで開かれた核兵器禁止条約の第1回締約国会議が3日間の日程を終え閉幕した。オブザーバー参加を見送った日本政府の不在が際立った会議だった。広島、長崎の両市長や被爆者らが出席したのに、政府は参加を見送り、参加国から「唯一の戦争被爆国が参加したがらないとは驚くべきことだ」などと批判された。不参加は歴史的過ちだったと言うしかない。

[…]

注目されたのはオブザーバー参加した国々だ。日本とともに「クアッド」を構成するオーストラリアや、核同盟の北大西洋条約機構(NATO)に加盟するドイツ、ノルウェー、オランダ、ベルギーである。ドイツ代表は、核の緊張緩和に向けて条約支持国との「自由な対話と誠実な議論」が重要だと強調した。
 共同通信の太田昌克編集委員はこれらのオブザーバー参加を「核に依存する国でも、核兵器の正統性を否定する核禁止条約への道義的支持を示せることを実証した」と評価した。そして、日本の不参加を「後世史家から『歴史的な過ち』と指弾されかねない」と批判した。

[…]

米統治時代に1300発の核が配備され誤射事故も起きた沖縄にも、核戦争の危機は迫っている。核抑止に頼らず、核兵器による威嚇も禁止する核兵器禁止条約こそが「核廃絶」への道筋だ。歴史的な過ちを一刻も早く正すべきである。

全文

Posted in *English | Tagged , | Comments Off on <社説>核禁止条約会議閉幕 不参加は歴史的過ち via 琉球新報